Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Manning #1 pick article...


dfv87
 Share

Recommended Posts

Still not sure I could go with a QB #1 overall due to our scoring system as we do not value thrown TD's right, (3 friggin pts!!!$#$%!#^#! sorry, I am getting over losing that debate) but he sure is a nice option to automatically plug in for sure points. I know you are either a fan or a hater with Manning mostly but what is your opinion on taking him #1 overall?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love to be sitting at no. 2, seeing who of Manning and LT drops to me.

 

877146[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

I was thinking the same at #3 letting Alexander or Manning fall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have 6 point passing tds and legnth of TD - so Manning is a pretty dang good choice.

 

We also have points for receptions/accuracy (1 point per completion, -.5 per attempt) which also works nicely for Manning

 

877159[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I'm in a league that awards points off of heavy yardage straight up, 100+ for receivers and backs gets you 10 pts along with 6 pts for TDs. The QBs get their points after 300+ yards (10pts) along with 6pts for each TD. I've got the number one pick and am strongly considering Manning. I took LT at 1.2 last year and he paled in comparison to Manning. In this league Manning scored 344 total points for the season while LT was at 178. The 100 yards or nothing really kills the backs and receivers in this league. I've been lobbying for months to change the system but most people won't budge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm in a league that awards points off of heavy yardage straight up, 100+ for receivers and backs gets you 10 pts along with 6 pts for TDs. The QBs get their points after 300+ yards (10pts) along with 6pts for each TD. I've got the number one pick and am strongly considering Manning. I took LT at 1.2 last year and he paled in comparison to Manning. In this league Manning scored 344 total points for the season while LT was at 178. The 100 yards or nothing really kills the backs and receivers in this league. I've been lobbying for months to change the system but most people won't budge.

 

877252[/snapback]

 

 

 

yeah, I am all about something incremental...

 

All TDs 6 pts.

 

QBs

.02 Per Yard (Passing, Receiving and Rushing)

1 Per Completion

-.5 Per Attempt

-2 Per Interception

-2 Per Fumble Lost

2 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 30 and 39 Yards

3 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 40 and 49 Yards

4 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 50 and 54 Yards

5 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 55 and 59 Yards

6 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 60 and 64 Yards

7 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 65 and 69 Yards

8 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 70 and 100 Yards

 

Rbs

.05 Per Yard (Passing, Receiving and Rushing)

.6 Per Reception

-2 Per Fumble Lost

2 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 20 and 29 Yards

3 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 30 and 39 Yards

4 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 40 and 44 Yards

5 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 45 and 49 Yards

6 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 50 and 54 Yards

7 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 55 and 59 Yards

8 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 60 and 100 Yards

 

WRs

.05 Per Yard (Passing, Receiving and Rushing)

.5 Per Reception

-2 Per Fumble Lost

2 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 30 and 39 Yards

3 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 40 and 49 Yards

4 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 50 and 54 Yards

5 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 55 and 59 Yards

6 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 60 and 64 Yards

7 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 65 and 69 Yards

8 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 70 and 100 Yards

 

 

TE

.07 Per Yard (Passing, Receiving and Rushing)

.6 Per Reception

-2 Per Fumble Lost

2 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 20 and 29 Yards

3 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 30 and 39 Yards

4 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 40 and 44 Yards

5 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 45 and 49 Yards

6 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 50 and 54 Yards

7 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 55 and 59 Yards

8 Bonus Points for Touchdowns between 60 and 100 Yards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

:D I was about to post a thread on thei very topic. The case can certainly be made but I'm not convinced that RB is as deep as everyone else thinks. You still aren't going to be drafting viable #2 RBs after the mid 3rd round, IMHO, which is the biggest problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:D I was about to post a thread on thei very topic.  The case can certainly be made but I'm not convinced that RB is as deep as everyone else thinks.  You still aren't going to be drafting viable #2 RBs after the mid 3rd round, IMHO, which is the biggest problem.

 

877319[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Exactly. I'm concerned that by the time I get my swing picks all of the backs will be gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. I'm concerned that by the time I get my swing picks all of the backs will be gone.

 

877328[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Personally, I prefer to draft mid to late. I have in my head certain players I want and I like to kind of let the draft dictate where I'm going. If you take Manning #1 overall, you HAVE to go RB at 2.12 and 3.01.

 

Don't you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I prefer to draft mid to late.  I have in my head certain players I want and I like to kind of let the draft dictate where I'm going.  If you take Manning #1 overall, you HAVE to go RB at 2.12 and 3.01.

 

Don't you?

 

877335[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

That was my plan if I decided on Manning at 1.1. There's 14 teams though, so I'm a little concerned.

 

I've found that I have my best drafts at the 4, 5, 10, 11 positions in a 12 team draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I prefer to draft mid to late.  I have in my head certain players I want and I like to kind of let the draft dictate where I'm going.  If you take Manning #1 overall, you HAVE to go RB at 2.12 and 3.01.

 

Don't you?

 

877335[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I don't think you *have* to. Though, at least 1 RB is a must. But if someone like Tory Holt or Chad Johnson is available at 3.01 - and your low-risk #2 RB options just aren't there - maybe you take the difference-making WR instead. While I'd certainly make RB/RB my primary goal at 2.12 and 3.01, I wouldn't be so married to that strategy that I don't at least evaluate and contrast the #1 WR talent versus the #2 RB talent that is available at 3.01. Checking my gut for which RBs could still be available at 4.12/5.01 would also affect that decision.

Edited by yo mama
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Find the difference between Manning and the #12 Qb in your system. Then look at LT compared to the number 12 Rb in your system. You could be suprised. You could hypothetically draft Collins in the fifth round, plus LT or Manning and say Rudi Johnson in the second. I would never do it. I personally always go- Rb, Rb, Wr,Wr, QB. Check last year's stats, they won't lie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I took Manning at 1.3 in the 12 team IDP mock draft (which I believe will still be a league) I still got Martin and Jordan in the next two rounds, which wasn't so bad. The rookie RB's were still there too. I think Manning is a more viable option than ever before, given the depth at RB this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Find the difference between Manning and the #12 Qb in your system. Then look at LT compared to the number 12 Rb in your system. You could be suprised. You could hypothetically draft Collins in the fifth round, plus LT or Manning and say Rudi Johnson in the second. I would never do it. I personally always go- Rb, Rb, Wr,Wr, QB. Check last year's stats, they won't lie.

 

877424[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Okay: #1 QB last year in my BOTH (Culpepper) had 408 points. The #12 RB (Holmes) had 235 points, for a combined 643.

 

The #1 RB (Alexander) had 290 points; the #12 QB (Hasselbeck) had 188, for a combined 478.

 

643 vs. 478. You're right: last year's stats do not lie.

 

EDIT TO ADD: even coupling Culpepper's 408 points with the #24 RB's (Jamal Lewis) 143 would get me a combined 551 points, which still exceeds Alexander + Hasselbeck.

Edited by yo mama
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay: #1 QB last year in my BOTH (Culpepper) had 408 points.  The #12 RB (Holmes) had 235 points, for a combined 643.

 

The #1 RB (Alexander) had 290 points; the #12 QB (Hasselbeck) had 188, for a combined 478.

 

643 vs. 478.  You're right: last year's stats do not lie.

 

EDIT TO ADD: even coupling Culpepper's 408 points with the #24 RB's (Jamal Lewis) 143 would get me a combined 551 points, which still exceeds Alexander + Hasselbeck.

 

877445[/snapback]

 

 

 

Hooray for you! You used his ill-chosen numbers and gave an example that's extremely flawed. To use QB1/RB12 vs RB1/QB12 is comparing apples to oranges when you actually enter drafting into the equation. There are multiple reasons but I'm going to point out just one. RB12 will be drafted early to mid 2nd round while QB12 will not go until somewhere between rounds 7-9.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hooray for you!  You used his ill-chosen numbers and gave an example that's extremely flawed.  To use QB1/RB12 vs RB1/QB12 is comparing apples to oranges when you actually enter drafting into the equation.  There are multiple reasons but I'm going to point out just one.  RB12 will be drafted early to mid 2nd round while QB12 will not go until somewhere between rounds 7-9.

 

877677[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Yeah, I know. That's why I took it a step further and compared RB1/QB12 to QB1/RB24. Because RB24 will be drafted in the 3rd or 4th round, compared to RB12, which (as you pointed out) will be drafted in the early 2nd. You did see where I did that in my post, didn't you? You know, that part of my post that you quoted, and all?

 

And I don't know about your leagues, but in most of mine QB12 is gone by round 5-6. But that's gonna vary from league to league and scoring system to scoring system, so there is no point is arguing about that. However, even the #36 RB's (Chestor Taylor/T.J. Duckett: take your pick) 88 points, when added to Culpepper's 408 points, would total 496. And that still exceeds Alexander + Hasselbeck's 478.

 

Got any more constructive counter-points you'd like to make?

Edited by yo mama
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got any more constructive counter-points you'd like to make?

 

877692[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

yo

this is not a critisism(SP), but the other thing you need to take into account is the fact that you only start 1 qb and usually 2, maybe 3 rb's. I think you have to compare total points for the 3/4 not just the QB and RB!.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got any more constructive counter-points you'd like to make?

 

877692[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

yo

this is not a critisism(SP), but the other thing you need to take into account is the fact that you only start 1 qb and usually 2, maybe 3 rb's. I think you have to compare total points for the 3/4 not just the QB and RB!.

 

877758[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

True, alchico. I skipped a step in explaining my work, and for that I appologize. However, I assure you that I did consider your point. Allow me to illustrate...

 

Let's assuming I've got the 1.01 spot and I'm debating going Manning or LT2, based on the notion that each will perform at a level simlilar to the best player in their respective positions last year.

 

Either way, I want a RB at 2.12. Let's assume for the sake of argument that, either way, I think I can find Curtis Martin at 2.12. (And I think that as of today, that is realistic because his average draft position in serious Antsports mock drafts from June 1 to present is 2.11 in a 12 team league).

 

I'm pretty sure I'll get some combination of TE or WR at 3.1 and 4.12. Those players would be the same in either scenario, so we can factor them out of the comparison.

 

However, at 5.1 I plan on getting a QB (assuming I drafted LT2 at 1.01) or my #2 RB (assuming I went Manning at 1.01). (I realize that most people who draft a QB in the first round will get their #2 RB sooner than the 5th round, but I'm exaggerating the strategy to prove my point, as well as to compare apples to apples for a 5th round pick.)

 

In the fifth round I expect Hasselbeck to be available at QB. (And I think that as of today, that is realistic because his average draft position in serious Antsports mock drafts from June 1 to present is 6.08 in a 12 team league. He's about the 9th QB off the board, on average). I also expect DeShaun Foster to be available at RB. (And I think that as of today, that is realistic because his average draft position in serious Antsports mock drafts from June 1 to present is 5.03 in a 12 team league. On average, he's about the 30rd RB off the board).

 

Excluding the TE/WRs, let's compare:

 

Team 1

Manning @ 1.01 - 408 points (1st best QB from last year: Culpepper)

C. Martin @ 2.12 - 267 points (Martin's points from last season)

Foster @ 5.01 - 123 points (30th best RB from last year: J. Jones)

- Team 1 Total: 798

 

Team 2

 

LT2 @ 1.01 - 290 points (1st best RB from last year: Alexander)

C. Martin @ 2.12 - 267 points (Martin's points from last season)

Hasselbeck @ 5.01 - 265 points (9th best QB from last year: Brees)

- Team 2 Total: 822

 

Hmmm. A mere 24 points difference, or about 3% less production from Team 1. But that's assuming I draft my #2 RB in the 5th round...

 

And the whole point of my endless jawing in this thread is to lend support to the notion that drafting Manning in the 1st isn't a totally crazy idea. Depending on your scoring system, how your draft unfolds, and assuming you surround him with a decent cast, that strategy can be just about as effective as drafting LT2 first. More importantly, this exercise clearly illustrates that Manning makes even more sense in the 1st round after LT2 and maybe Alexander are off the board.

Edited by yo mama
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got any more constructive counter-points you'd like to make?

 

877692[/snapback]

 

 

 

We could go in circles for weeks with this debating who'd be drafted where and nitpicking everyone's choices so I'm just going to get down to the nuts and bolts of my argument against drafting Manning at #1 versus LT.

 

In my main redraft, one that favors QB scoring by the way, for the 2002 and 2003 seasons Manning averaged 5 pts more per game than the #12 QB . He then had one monster year in 2004 and averaged 13 pts more per game than the #12 QB. LT on the other hand averaged 7.5 pts per game more than the #12 RB over that same two year span and in 2004 averaged 7 more. Lt has done basically the same thing for three years in a row. Manning had arguably the single best season ever for a QB and people expect him to duplicate it. I don't see it happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had Manning last season, and the main reason he needs to be considered at 1.1, and it is pointed out in the article, is that he is out there EVERY week. And he is out there, healthy. Not nicked up like Favre or RBs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information